Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of omarg.developer@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.212.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAgciqpK6iO=i2qDirya=4K+HekpAemJi+LyJ6z-2KjS29dWrg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1333609450.67573.YahooMailNeo@web130106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<0AED1687-C22E-42D3-9A1B-541774C646AC@gmail.com>
	<CAJQBtgnjKuh-Y-sUafrj6LgFR8e5755Y7F8gO5POP++XmVVCnw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F7D805F.8040708@leichtgewicht.at>
	<CAJQBtgn4uO8vSLRSWxEL6LAeWtR420+nxj3Jz3YJqn3XxqkPpQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEFz_vtaq8nsP4D15gxUDidJYye8ThRXk8aLxGBUS82Oozx-=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAgciqqVNTA2gaAsUPPYeZLzwW-j7DafqV21M=viUbnAczgo-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJQBtgmHQTR-nJ=VZSO=e0e6RQxnoNCsCHet3F1mV=70gowQag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEFz_vu36=8ZqnPqqsHo-1GNG_tx6sh29Bn_HbgKeW=LqF2TKg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJQBtg=kqLE=TRpZEjKcn2dwYXnmpEPKKRuT4ugkKqLMDNOyuA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAgciqpK6iO=i2qDirya=4K+HekpAemJi+LyJ6z-2KjS29dWrg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:34:15 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAEFz_vspRH=RDZEmDk3ACmgK4WSUe_W21tBJN=HCNdhL0jAmJA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: flex breakdown
From: Omar Gonzalez <omarg.developer@gmail.com>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00504502cf807e4b9a04bcf2c990

--00504502cf807e4b9a04bcf2c990
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Roland Zwaga <roland@stackandheap.com>wrote:

> >
> > Again, I didn't say that either sources or other parts of the SDK are
> > useless, what I say is that people don't use them quite often. Some -
> never
> > use them. This is a common sense, that if a feature is not mandatory -
> make
> > it explicitly optional... It doesn't matter how good uses you can find
> for
> > the things in the SDK. The goal _is not_ to provide users with as much
> > stuff as you can. The purpose is to give them what they really need and
> be
> > flexible about giving per request.
>
>
> While I agree with your point about making a seldom-used feature optional,
> it might
> also be true that basing the assumption that these features are seldom used
> on a poll
> that was conducted among FlashDevelop users might skew this assumption
> towards
> only a certain part of the flash/flex developer community.
> What I mean is, it might be true that these features are seldom used
> amongst FlashDevelop
> users, it might not be representative for users of FDT, IDEA, FlashBuilder,
> etc.
> I don't claim to know the preferences of these user groups, but they might
> be vastly different from
> the preferences of the FlashDevelop community.
> Having said that, I do feel you have a point about making certain parts of
> the SDK optional,
> I don't think flexibility is a bad thing, so I think you raise a valid
> point that warrants a healthy
> discussion :)
>
> cheers,
>
> Roland
>

+1 to this summary.

-omar

--00504502cf807e4b9a04bcf2c990--